•  FOREIGN  *  R.€LiGIO\/S  •  SGRKES 

TH6     NEW   MESSAGE    IN 
TH€  TEACHING  OFJeSUS 


r  '  a  A 


3Fr0ttt  ttj?  ICtbrarg  nf 
rnfrsanr  Settiamtn  Smktnrfagr  Harfielln 

\\\t  2Jthrarg  r& 
Princeton  ©Ijwlngtral  g>?mtnar0 


BS  ^415  .BJ  190/ 
Bachmann,  Philipp,  1864- 

1931. 
The  new  message  in  the 

teaching  of  Jesus 

■r»r<   n  a  -i  r     t>o   -i  n  r\  -? 

\ 

Foreign  Religious  Series 


Edited  by 
R.  J.  COOKE,  D.  D. 


Second  Series.    i6mo.  cloth.    Each  40  cents,  met. 


DO  WE  NEED  CHRIST  FOR 

COMMUNION  WITH  GOD  ? 

By  Professor  Ludwig  Lemme,  of  the  University 
of  Heidelberg 


ST.   PAUL  AS  A  THEOLOGIAN 

(two  parts) 
By  Professor  Paul  Feine,  of  the  University  of  Vienna 


THE  NEW  MESSAGE  IN  THE   TEACHING 
OF  JESUS 

By  Professor  Philipp  Bachmann,  of  the  University 
of  Erlangen 


THE  PECULIARITY  OF  THE  RELIGION 

OF  THE  BIBLE 

By  Professor  Conrad  Von  Orelli,  of  the  University 
of  Basle 


OUR  LORD 

By  Professor  K.  Muller,  of  the  University  of  Erlangen 


The  New  Message  in 
the  Teaching  of  Jesus 


By 
PHILIPP  'BACHMANN 

Professor  of  Theology  in  the  University  of  Erlangen 


NEW    YORK:      EATON    &    MAINS 
CINCINNATI  :  JENNINGS  &  GRAHAM 


Copyright,  1907,  by 
EATON  &  MAINS. 


THE  QUESTION 

In  times  of  old  Israel  was  fruitful  in  re- 
ligious vitality.  Holy  seers  and  singers, 
pious  women,  God-inspired  heroes  formed 
the  living  power  of  its  history.  The  whole 
Israelitish  nationality  was  governed  by  the 
thought  of  God — early  it  willingly  suffered 
to  be  impregnated  by  it;  and  early  again  it 
was  unwillingly  subdued  by  it.  But  the  re- 
ligious life  in  mutual  conditionality  was 
here  most  intimately  connected  with  the  life 
of  the  nation.  At  decisive  turns  of  national 
and  political  development  piety  and  religious 
belief  are  therefore  also  in  the  most  vital 
commotion.  As  a  matter  of  course  centuries 
of  rest  and  relaxation  follow.  The  religious 
power  without  always  becoming  wholly 
extinct,  loses  nevertheless  some  of  its  fer- 
vent immediateness,  some  of  its  former  in- 
exhaustible depth.  Thus  changed,  ebb  and 
flow,  in  Israel's  religious  development.  The 
tide  is  the  hour  of  living  production.    From 

hidden  sources  come  new  benefits.     Who- 

s 


6  The  New  Message 

ever  draws  from  them,  brings  fresh  life. 
The  ebb  brings  new  tasks;  what  the  tide 
brought  up,  it  collects,  preserves,  works  up. 
In  the  place  of  production  comes  reproduc- 
tion; the  new  is  conserved,  finally  it  be- 
comes old,  being  long  possessed,  and  the 
times  gradually  become  ripe  for  the  prophet, 
for  the  genius,  who  is  to  lift  himself  up  and 
the  times  with  him  to  a  new  development. 

Jesus  descended  from  Israel's  soil.  One 
can  hardly  think  too  realistically  of  this, 
how  much  he  was  inwardly  connected  with 
the  religious  peculiarity  of  his  people  and 
their  laws  of  development.  He  grew  up 
under  the  influence  of  the  ancient,  sacred 
authorities  of  his  people,  the  Scripture,  the 
cult,  the  entire  religious  order  of  life  and 
mode  of  thinking.  These  influences  were 
especially  strong  about  him.  For  according 
to  its  general  nature  the  time  of  Jesus  be- 
longed on  the  whole  to  the  more  conserva- 
tive and  reproductive  periods  of  Israel's  his- 
tory of  religion.  The  synagogues  were 
above  all  the  places  where  the  religious  life 
of  the  Jews  was  moulded  and  fostered ;  in  the 
synagogue,  however,  ruled  the  scribe  and 
he  was  the  keeper  of  tradition.    No  public, 


The  Question  7 

or  any  paid  office  gave  him  so  much  influ- 
ence. The  scribes  were  in  themselves  pri- 
vate persons  like  others ;  not  a  few  of  them 
made  their  living  by  the  work  of  their 
hands.  But  they  differed  from  others  by 
their  theological  professional  training.  They 
devoted  close  study  to  the  Holy  Scripture. 
They  understood,  what  the  common  man  in 
the  time  of  Jesus  did  not  understand,  the 
Hebrew,  the  language  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment; and  through  these  scribes  he  was 
obliged  to  have  the  Scripture,  which  he 
wished  to  hear,  translated  into  the  Aramaic 
vernacular.  The  religious  lectures  in  the 
schools  were  not  exclusively  by  them,  yet 
for  the  most  part  this  instruction  was  in  their 
hands.  On  the  basis  of  the  Old  Testament 
law  they  made  the  law  for  the  time  being. 
As  spiritual  guides  they  often  came  into  very 
close  relationship  with  the  individual.  With- 
out their  help  he  was  unable  to  apply  con- 
scientiously to  the  different  conditions  of  life 
the  intricate  injunctions  of  the  law  and  the 
"traditions  of  the  elders."  Those  of  Israel's 
youth  who  were  mentally  aspiring,  attended 
their  lectures.  Thus  they  had  the  oppor- 
tunity to  exercise  an  influence  in  all  direc- 


8  The  New  Message 

tions.  And  they  exercised  it  throughout  in 
the  sense  of  a  strict  obedience  toward  that 
which  in  religious  matters  was  considered  by 
the  fathers  in  virtue  of  the  Scripture  as 
lawful  and  as  law.  The  light  and  shade  of 
their  activity  came  from  their  most  peculiar 
method.  True,  they  had  to  succumb  to  the 
movements  with  which  Judaism  in  general 
had  to  submit  in  religious  matters  since  the 
extinction  of  the  prophetic  spirit;  but  they 
also  helped  at  the  same  time  that  such  move- 
ments appeared  as  the  highest  and  only  au- 
thority. Though  they  presented  something 
new  in  their  treatment,  it  appeared  as 
ancient  and  demanded  respect.  Thus  the 
time  when  Jesus  appeared,  was  under  the 
sign  of  the  rule  of  the  old.  Jesus  also 
worked  in  the  manner  of  a  scribe.  He 
taught  in  the  schools  from  the  Scripture, 
gave  pastoral  advice  as  to  good  and  evil; 
and  gathered  a  circle  of  studious  hearers 
around  him.  As  a  result  he  was  also  hon- 
ored with  the  title  of  the  scribes,  "Rabbi." 
He  was  called  by  the  people  "Master"  (Mark 
5.  35;  Luke  17.  13);  "Rabbi"  by  his  dis- 
ciples (Mark  4.  38;  John  11.  8)  and  even 
by  the  members  of  the  body  of  the  scribes 


The  Question  9 

(Matt.  8.  19;  12.  38;  Luke  11.  45;  John  3. 
2).  Jesus  did  not  object  to  this  address 
(see  Matt.  19.  16-19)  ;  he  even  found  it 
in  harmony  with  his  character  (John  13. 
13;  Matt.  23.  8). 

Thus  with  many  traits  of  his  appearance 
he  could  be  classified  with  that  which  ex- 
isted, and  it  was  his  own  expressed  in- 
tention to  let  alone  the  venerable,  ancient 
foundations  of  the  whole.  "Think  not  that 
I  am  come  to  destroy  the  law,  or  the 
prophets"  (Matt.  5.  17).  Yet,  the  picture 
of  Jesus  did  not  fully  and  always  fit  in  that 
setting.  The  scribes  themselves  did  not  find 
him  up  to  the  mark ;  because  he  was  not  edu- 
cated according  to  their  rules;  he  was  only 
a  self-taught  person  (John  7.  15).  His 
teaching  had  not  the  traditional  origin ;  and 
it  lacked  also  the  traditional  manner.  How 
could  he,  who  had  not  the  stamp  of  the 
school,  be  at  home  in  mere  traditions?  Jesus 
did  not  attend  the  lectures  of  the  rabbis, 
which  necessarily  means  at  the  same  time — 
by  all  connection  with  the  old — that  he  had 
nevertheless  and  from  the  beginning  in  him- 
self something  that  was  independent,  fresh, 
and   immediate.     When   he  stepped   forth 


io  The  New  Message 

from  his  retirement,  the  people  recognized 
his  influence  in  the  sentiment :  "He  teaches 
as  one  having  authority  and  not  as  our 
scribes"  (Matt.  7.  29).  What  new  doctrine 
is  this?  (Mark  1.  27.)  Such  recognition  of 
the  new,  as  it  did  not  exist  before,  referred 
not  immediately  and  altogether  to  the  word 
of  this  scribe,  but  to  the  deeds  accompanying 
his  word;  "for  with  authority  commandeth 
he  even  the  unclean  spirits,  and  they  obey 
him"  (Mark  1.  2y).  But  it  concerned  also 
his  word.  It  was  felt  that  this  teacher  need- 
ed no  authority  such  as  the  schools  conferred 
through  its  learning  which  was  obtained  and 
preserved  through  centuries.  By  a  power 
immediately  belonging  to  himself  he  secured 
for  his  word  a  place  in  human  hearts. 

Wherein  did  this  power  consist  ?  It  was  the 
power  of  his  independent  personality;  but 
it  was  also  the  peculiar  character  of  his 
preaching,  which,  because  convincing,  ear- 
nestly aroused  the  heart  and  conscience.  He 
not  only  spoke  as  one  differing  from  those 
whom  they  usually  heard,  but  he  also  spoke 
something  different  from  what  they  usually 
heard,  differing  so  much  in  all  this  that  oc- 
casionally Jesus  had  to  emphasize  the  great 


The  Question  ii 

contrast  between  the  authoritative  old  and 
the  freshly  flowing  new:  "No  man  also 
seweth  a  piece  of  new  cloth  on  an  old  gar- 
ment, else  the  new  piece  that  filled  it  up 
taketh  away  from  the  old,  and  the  rent  is 
made  worse"  (Mark  2.  21). 

The  nature  of  the  future  work  of  his 
disciples  Jesus  comprised  once  in  the  rule: 
"Every  scribe  which  is  instructed  into  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  is  like  unto  a  man  that 
is  an  householder,  which  bringeth  forth  out 
of  his  treasure  things  new  and  old"  (Matt. 
13.  52).  Things  new  and  old;  this  means 
here  in  the  widest  sense — authoritative  and 
personal,  traditional  and  newly  received,  ac- 
quired and  experienced,  common  and  indi- 
vidual. But  Jesus  himself  was  such  a  scribe 
instructed  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  the 
highest  among  all,  the  most  faithful  to  tra- 
dition and  at  the  same  time  the  most  produc- 
tive, the  end  and  the  beginning  in  one.  Thus 
he  carried  in  his  inward  treasure  things  old, 
which  he  had  from  others  and  shared  with 
others,  and  things  new,  which  originally 
and  solely  belonged  to  him.  The  clear  ques- 
tion then  is:  Where  does  the  independence 
of  Jesus  begin  ? 


12  The  New  Message 

What  is  the  New,  zvhich  separates  him 
from  his  surroundings?  We  seek  it  in 
his  teaching.  But  is  not  this  a  mistake 
from  the  start?  Does  not  the  productive 
power  of  Jesus  consist  in  his  personality, 
in  the  carrying  out  of  a  personal  life  filled 
by  God  with  greatness  and  purity  and  fire? 
Is  not  this  more  important  and  more  orig- 
inal than  the  ideas  and  thoughts  which  filled 
him?  The  present  time  has  a  special  eye 
for  this  side  of  the  life  of  Jesus.  But  it  is  in 
danger  of  running  into  opposition  with 
reality  by  tearing  asunder  the  teaching  and 
the  person  of  Jesus.  In  opposition  to  simple 
historical  reality,  we  repeat,  for  those  first 
disciples  who  lived  entirely  in  the  immediate 
contemplation  of  the  personality  of  Jesus, 
felt  themselves  bound  to  him  because  they 
had  to  confess:  "Thou  hast  the  words  of 
Eternal  Life"  (John  6.  68)  ;  and  Jesus  him- 
self bound  with  all  emphasis  to  his  sayings 
those  who  wished  to  be  his  disciples  and 
through  him  raised  to  salvation  (Matt.  7. 
24).  His  word  is  the  seed  of  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  (Mark  4.  14),  for  it  is  spirit 
and  life  and  the  power  of  sanctification 
(John  6.  63 ;  17.  17).    But  even  with  a  gen- 


The  Question  13 

eral  psychological  reality,  that  separation 
and  opposition  does  not  agree;  for  a  per- 
sonal life,  just  as  it  is  purified,  harmonious 
and  independent  in  itself,  has  not  its  roots 
outside  of  the  thoughts,  cognitions,  ideas  of 
man,  but  in  them,  though  not  exclusively  in 
them.  And  this  applies  to  Jesus  in  a  special 
degree.  To  be  sure,  his  word  came  entirely 
from  the  depths  of  his  life  purely  and  strictly 
grounded  in  God ;  but  the  manifold  fullness 
of  his  personality,  all  his  humility  and  all  his 
courage,  grew  up  also  in  the  truth  which 
filled  him  and  revealed  to  him  God,  himself 
and  the  kingdom  of  God.  His  whole  soul 
lived  in  the  inner  word  with  which  he  appre- 
hended this,  and  in  the  outer  word,  in  which 
he  spoke  of  it.  His  speech  is  the  revelation- 
side  of  his  nature ;  and  whoever  approached 
him,  must  take  him  at  his  word.  When 
therefore,  the  question  is  raised,  What  is  the 
new  in  Jesus,  we  are  permitted  to  seek  it,  not 
merely  naturally,  but  first  of  all  in  his  teach- 
ing. Newton  revealed  the  laws  of  gravita- 
tion ;  Kant  understood  the  conscience  as  the 
categorical  imperative  of  pure  duty;  Paul 
presented  the  idea  of  justification  by  faith — 
but  what  new  thing  did  Jesus  teach  us?. 


II 

THE  INSUFFICIENT  ANSWER 

Belief  in  the  one  living  God  was  for  a 
long  time  the  peculiar  distinction  of  Judaism 
above  other  nations.  It  expressed  this  belief 
in  such  form  that  it  asserted  a  unique  com- 
munion-relation between  God  and  itself. 
Even  the  history  of  the  first  Christian  church 
shows  that  it  was  very  hard  for  many  a 
born  Jew  to  divest  himself  of  the  idea  that 
one  must  be  a  Jew  in  order  to  be  assured  of 
the  goodness  of  God.  Christianity  has  fun- 
damentally overcome  this  natural  barrier  of 
religion.  On  this  account  it  is  sometimes 
asserted  that  the  originality  of  its  founder 
consisted  in  this,  that  he  taught  that  God  is 
the  shield  and  keeper  not  of  one  people  but 
of  all  men ;  with  him  God  is  no  respecter  of 
persons.  In  those  circles  in  which  scientific 
mode  of  speculation  is  preached,  this  con- 
ception is  laid  aside,  especially  when  it  im- 
agines that  the  significance  of  Jesus  is  cre- 
ated by  that  thought.  But,  as  seems  to  be,  it 
has  its  great  after-effects  elsewhere.  It  is 
14 


The  Insufficient  Answer         15 

quite  natural.  Christian  belief  in  God  grew 
out  of  the  Jewish;  but  of  the  differences 
between  the  two,  the  universalist  idea  of 
the  Christian  is  most  obvious.  Judaism 
was  a  national  religion.  Christianity  is  a 
world  religion.  It  must  therefore  be  that  its 
founder  who  effected  this  progress,  is  a  his- 
torical character.  One  thing  also  is  undoubt- 
edly correct  in  this  conception :  From  Christ, 
and  from  no  other  did  early  Christianity  re- 
ceive courage  to  offer  itself  to  the  heathen 
world,  to  the  cultured  and  the  barbarous. 
Paul  is  indeed  an  organ,  even  the  chiefest  of 
all  for  this  progress,  but  he  was  not  its 
author.  But  the  ruling  New  doctrine,  which 
Jesus  taught,  is  not  expressed  by  that 
thought.  True,  Jesus  taught  that  the  world 
is  the  field  in  which  God  soweth  his  seed  of 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  (Matt.  13.  38)  ;  he 
prophesied  that  the  kingdom  of  God  should 
be  taken  from  the  Jews  and  be  given  to  the 
Gentiles  (Matt.  21.  43;  8.  n-19).  But  the 
idea  of  an  international  religious  communion 
as  the  ideal  of  the  future,  is  already  met 
with  in  the  Old  Testament  (Isa.  25.  6;  49. 
6;  60.  3;  Micah  4.  1  seq. ;  Zeph.  3.  9;  Hag. 
2.  6,  9 ;  Zech.  2.  1 1 )  ;  it  is  not  even  wholly 


1 6  The  New  Message 

foreign  to  rabbinic  Judaism,  and  has  on  the 
other  hand  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus  so  little 
of  the  strain,  that  in  the  conflict  between 
Jesus  and  Judaism,  it  only  cooperated  in  so 
far  as  it  included  the  rejection  of  Israel,  that 
is,  its  exclusion  from  the  world-embracing 
peace  of  God.  Inaccurate  observation  could 
in  our  days  even  lead  to  the  result  that  uni- 
versalism  was  entirely  foreign  to  Jesus ;  that 
it  is  far  away  from  forming  the  nucleus  of 
his  teaching. 

The  mistake  with  which  we  had  thus  far 
to  deal  has  its  origin,  not  so  much  in  certain 
facts  from  the  life-picture  of  Jesus,  as  in 
uncertain  expressions,  which  his  personality 
brings  to  bear  upon  us.  From  a  mistaken 
minimizing  of  some  real  traces  of  his  life, 
there  arose  in  the  period  of  the  Aufklarung 
or  "illumination''  and  still  arises  a  different 
conception  of  the  new  teaching  which  he 
brought.  Again  and  again  it  must  be  em- 
phasized that  Jesus  closely  connected  religion 
with  morality.  He  did  it  in  the  sense  that 
no  piety  is  of  any  value  which  is  lacking  in 
good  works.  Most  keenly  did  Jesus  express 
this  principle  when,  on  the  one  hand  he  had 
to  deal  with  the  conflict  between  the  sacred 


The  Insufficient  Answer         17 

ceremonies  in  the  cult  concerning  the  hand 
and  mouth,  and  on  the  other  the  simple 
every-day  work  of  love.  He  denied  to  the 
former  all  worth  and  considered  only  the 
good  deed.  The  praise  of  the  Samaritan 
who  has  no  part  in  the  sacred  sacrificial  cult 
of  Israel,  but  saves  him  that  fell  among  the 
thieves,  is  at  the  same  time  a  condemnation 
of  the  priest,  who  had  behind  him  a  holy 
day's  work  in  "the  service  of  God,"  but  re- 
fuses to  help  the  distressed  (Luke  10.  20- 
29).  To  do  good  sanctifies  the  Sabbath 
rather  than  strict  ritual  (Matt.  12.  7).  Not 
the  cry,  "Lord,  Lord"  leads  into  the  kingdom 
of  heaven,  but  the  exercise  of  love,  meekness, 
mercy,  peace  (Matt.  7.  21). 

In  all  this  imperishable  truths  are  given 
to  us.  But  whoever  infers  from  this  sub- 
ordination of  the  cultic  work  to  the  good 
deed,  that  Jesus  merged  the  religious  in  the 
moral,  and  that  this  is  his  real  merit,  obtains 
a  perfect  caricature  of  him.  Those  cere- 
monies were  a  mere  manifestation,  the  mere 
garb  of  religiousness.  Criticism  on  such 
can  therefore  also  take  place  in  the  interest 
of  a  purification  of  religion  instead  of  be- 
coming an  argument  for  that  conception. 


;i8  The  New  Message 

It  is  not  even  correct  to  say,  that  according 
to  Jesus  the  promotion  of  the  morally  good 
in  the  world  is  the  proper  participation  in 
the  kingdom  of  God.  For,  in  the  first  place, 
Jesus  is  a  preacher  of  religious  certainty; 
every  moral  ideal  which  he  teaches,  is  de- 
rived from  that.  Good  is  that  which  is  done 
in  imitation  of  God,  evincing  religious  be- 
lief in  him,  in  working  out  a  deep  sense  of 
divine  adoption  (Matt.  5.  48).  Had  Jesus 
taught  as  the  Aufklarung  or  "illumina- 
tion" often  imagined,  had  he  really  elimi- 
nated the  mystic,  condemned  the  withdrawal 
of  piety  to  monastic  retreats  and  put  the 
true  love  to  man,  or  even  the  service  of 
culture  in  the  forefront,  certainly,  in  the 
surroundings  in  which  he  lived  and  in  the 
entire  historical  movement  into  which  he  en- 
tered, this  were  something  perfectly  new, 
something  unheard  of,  and  our  questions 
were  soon  answered.  But  the  real  Jesus  has 
not  the  least  to  do  with  the  notion  that  be- 
neficence not  prayer  is  the  characteristic  of 
the  true  Christian  fashioned  after  Jesus. 

Thus  far  we  have  swung  round  the  utter- 
most circle  beyond  which  are  notions  which 
must  be  rejected  from  the  start,  provided 


The  Insufficient  Answer         19 

one  will  come  to  the  point.  We  are  not  the 
only  ones  who  reject  them ;  any  competent 
judge  will  do  so.  But  within  that  circle 
there  is  still  room  enough  for  very  different 
views;  and  the  present  time  is  the  least 
unanimous  concerning  what  propositions 
shall  be  agreed  upon.  Yea,  its  whole  inner 
confusion  is  connected  with  this,  that  in  the 
question — what  new  teaching  has  Jesus 
given  to  the  world — it  cannot  obtain  a  uni- 
form point  of  view. 

In  his  Wesen  der  Religion  (1903) 
Bousset  described  the  position  of  Jesus 
within  the  religious  historical  development 
of  humanity  and  especially  of  Israel.  Ac- 
cording to  him  Jesus  freed  religion  from  the 
national  and  ceremonial,  but  also  from  be- 
lief in  the  letter — not  by  violent  destruction 
of  the  old,  not  by  tenet  and  theories,  but  by 
unchaining  a  new  spirit  of  inwardness  and 
personality.  His  piety  embraced  a  less  as 
against  the  sum  of  a  thousand  single  deeds 
and  single  acts,  with  which  Judaism  had 
connected  the  worship  of  God ;  which  by  be- 
ing simpler,  was  at  the  same  time  deeper. 
Such  piety  rests  on  the  fear  of  the  almighty 
God;  but  from  it  rises  victorious  trust  in 


20  The  New  Message 

God  as  the  Father,  Creator,  Upholder  and 
Preserver  of  our  higher  spiritually  personal 
existence,  the  gracious  friend  of  sinners; 
and  it  exhausts  itself  in  moral  fruitfulness, 
which  comes  from  the  expectation  of  judg- 
ment before  the  eternal  Judge.  Moral,  re- 
deeming religion — to  state  it  in  the  full  clear- 
ness and  simplicity  of  its  nature — that  is  the 
originality  of  the  preaching  of  Jesus.  In 
its  center  "stands  belief  in  the  deliverance 
and  unchaining  of  the  good  will  through  the 
forgiveness  of  sins."1  Quite  a  number  of 
recent  descriptions  of  the  teaching  and  per- 
son of  Jesus  move  in  a  like  sphere  of 
thought.  Otto  praises  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
as  the  awakener  of  inward  piety  and  the  dis- 
coverer of  moral  personality.2  Julicher 
teaches  that  Jesus  gave  to  the  world  a  new 
ideal  of  morality;  unselfish  love,  and  a  new 
ideal  of  piety,  joyous  belief  in  the  Father  in 
heaven.3  Harnack  also  belongs  here.4  He 
distinguishes — wholly  in  the  sense  of  our 
inquiry  on  the  preaching  and  ideas  of  Jesus 
— things  which  he  had  in  common  with  his 


1  Bousset,  Jesus,  1904,  p.  79. 
2Leben  und  Werken  Jesu,  1905. 

3  Das  Messianische  Selbstbewusstsein  Jesus,  1903. 

4  Wesen  des  Christenthums,  1900,  p.  33  seq. 


The  Insufficient  Answer        21 

contemporaries,  and  things  which  were 
peculiar  to  him.  The  latter  are  the  really 
valuable  in  him.  And  it  is  in  this  that  by 
divesting  himself  of  everything  particular 
and  legal,  he  led  men  to  God  and  taught 
them  to  live  in  him  as  their  Father;  to 
bring  about  in  this  communion  of  their 
soul  with  God  the  theocracy;  to  lift  them- 
selves up  to  inner  strength  and  a  world- 
overcoming  independence  in  the  certainty 
of  the  forgiveness  of  sins ;  to  perceive  in  life 
and  death  the  hand  of  the  living  God  and  his 
providence;  to  make  humility  before  God 
the  source  of  everything  good  in  pure  love 
to  men.  In  his  new  knowledge  of  God, 
which  did  not  exist  before,  consists  the  pe- 
culiar life-content,  which  Jesus  asserts  of 
himself  under  the  idea  of  divine  Sonship. 
Less  easily  than  those  mentioned  above, 
Pfleiderer  gets  over  the  fact  that  Jesus  en- 
riched his  self-consciousness  with  the  full 
realization  of  ideas  of  his  Messiahship  and 
as  judge  of  the  world.  But  he  also  sees  the 
real  importance  of  the  person  of  Jesus  in 
this,  that  he  proclaimed  the  ideal  of  the 
government  of  God1  in  the  hearts  of  his  Ch  il- 
^his  was  also  the  ever  recurring  idea  of  Renan. — Editor. 


22  The  New  Message 

dren  and  in  the  fellowship  of  his  Kingdom.1 
The  idea  of  perfect  spiritually  moral  religion 
is  accordingly  the  new  teaching.  But  this 
in  so  far  as  it  advanced  to  clearness  and 
power  was  an  anticipation  and  impulse  al- 
ready dormant  in  humanity  in  general.2 

What  have  all  these  conceptions  in  com- 
mon? Humanity  was  a  long  time  already 
on  the  way  seeking  God;  but  Jesus  dis- 
covered him  for  humanity  and  expressed  in 
his  teaching  that  which  he  found,  whom  he 
found.  By  that  he  revealed  to  humanity 
what  genuine  belief  in  God  is  and  what  true 
love  is ;  showed  it  in  its  full  purity  and  gave 
it  to  humanity  for  an  everlasting  possession. 
He  is  accordingly  that  organ  through  which 
humanity  made  the  most  decisive  advance 
in  the  development  of  its  relation  to  God,  or, 
more  correctly,  obtained  the  height  of  per- 
fection. The  new  which  Jesus  brought  lies 
therefore  in  the  sphere  of  the  subjective  or 
inner  conditionality  of  humanity.  It  there- 
by remains  though  one  closes  not  his  eyes 
to  the  discernment  that  all  advances  of  his- 


1  Die  Entstehung  der  Christenthums,  1905,  p.  61  seq. 

2  Das  Christusbild  des  urchristlichen  Glaubens  in  reli- 
gionsgeschichtlichen  Beleuchtung,  1903. 


The  Insufficient  Answer        23 

tory,  and  therefore  all  that  is  effected  by 
Jesus,  took  place  under  the  inspiration  of  a 
divine  life. 

It  is  true,  that  in  Jesus  Christ  the  reve- 
lation of  God  consummated  itself,  but  this 
revelation  is  the  awakening  of  perfect  piety 
of  heart  in  man.  With  these  fundamental 
ideas  the  discussed  conception  comes  forth 
from  the  isolation  in  which  we  have  thus 
far  considered  it,  as  one  diffused  at  pres- 
ent, and  to  the  final  point  of  a  long  series 
of  opinions  concerning  Jesus  which,  in  spite 
of  all  variety,  agree  in  this,  that  the  dis- 
tinguishing mark  of  Jesus  relating  to  his 
teaching,  is  comprised  in  the  doctrine  of 
the  purification  of  the  moral  or  religious 
idea  of  humanity.  Thus  Schleiermacher 
measured  the  perfection  of  the  teaching  of 
Jesus  by  this,  that  he  actively  expressed  in 
it  his  original  and  creative  divine  conscious- 
ness with  the  intention  that  it  should  be  ap- 
propriated by  men.1  There  exists  a  chasm  be- 
tween Schleiermacher's  theology  and  that  of 
old  "illumination."  He  knew  better  than  this, 
and  the  newest  theology  following  his  traces 
knows  how  to  appreciate  the  creative  power 

1  Der  Christliche  Glaube,  p.  103. 


24  The  New  Message 

which  emanates  from  Jesus;  also  to  seek 
religion  not  in  correct  ideas  of  the  human 
mind  about  God,  but  in  hearts  moved  by  the 
spirit  of  God,  the  spirit  of  love.  Neverthe- 
less, there  is  something  in  common  between 
him  and  the  old  illumination  which  bridges 
this  chasm.  It  lies  in  the  direction  which 
engages  us.  For  even  the  "illumination"  of 
the  eighteenth  century  recognized  the  im- 
portance of  Jesus  in  this  that  he  developed 
and  transformed  the  religious  possession  of 
humanity.  In  his  Education  of  the  Human 
Race  (p.  58)  Lessing  himself  calls  Christ 
the  first  trustworthy,  practical  teacher  of  the 
immortality  of  the  soul.  But  in  the  main 
this  is  only  an  arbitrary  limitation,  a  taking 
out  of  a  single  sentence  from  a  comprehen- 
sive conception  which  Bretschneider  thus 
expressed :  "With  reference  to  his  teaching, 
Jesus  retained  the  general  religious  teach- 
ings of  the  Old  Testament  and  confirmed 
them;  and  changed  and  rejected  only  such 
statements  which  were  hurtful  to  morality, 
or  would  prevent  the  essence  of  religion,  es- 
pecially the  merit  of  sacrifices,  of  the  many 
daily  prayers,  of  Levitical  purification,  the 
burdensome  ceremonial  service,  resting  on 


The  Insufficient  Answer        25 

tradition,  and  the  narrow,  bigoted  notion  of 
the  Jews,  that  God  is  their  natural  God  who 
loves  them  only  and  hates  all  other  nations. 
In  the  main  he  confirmed  and  purified  the 
doctrine  of  God  as  Spirit,  who  is  to  be  wor- 
shiped in  spirit,  as  Father  of  all  men;  who 
wishes  to  bless  all,  give  life  to  all;  of  his 
wise  providence  ruling  all  men;  of  immor- 
tality and  moral  retribution  on  this  side  and 
on  the  other  side  of  the  grave;  and  taught 
at  the  same  time,  a  virtue  which  is  to  come 
from  a  pure  source — the  love  to  God  and 
man  and  which  is  founded  on  the  natural 
disposition  of  man,  is  able  to  develop  the 
humane  or,  if  one  will,  the  divine  in  man 
without  ascetic  aberration."1  Finally — with 
all  his  opposition  to  the  mere  rationalism  of 
the  "illumination" — we  must  here  also  men- 
tion Herder.  As  he  understands  Christ  he 
meant  to  fashion  men  of  God,  who  from  pure 
motives  promoted  the  welfare  of  others  and 
self -suffering  ruled  as  kings  in  the  kingdom 
of  truth  and  goodness.2 

Who  could   deny  the  truth   in   all  this! 
Christendom  will  always  insist  that  we  must 

1  Handbuch  der  Dogmatik,  ii,  p.  153. 

2  Ideen  zur  Philosophic  der  Geschichte,  xvii,  introduction. 


26  The  New  Message 

seek  in  the  word  of  Jesus  the  norm 
for  religious  service  in  spirit  and  in  truth, 
and  it  will  never  cease  to  derive  from  it  liv- 
ing impulses  in  that  direction.  But  we  must 
not  forget  the  question,  whether  the  new 
which  Jesus  brought,  is  already  described 
exhaustively,  yea,  whether  in  that  which 
Jesus  taught  in  that  direction,  something 
really  and  fundamentally  new,  is  given  at 
all.  There  is  a  method  of  consideration 
which  the  second  form  of  this  question, 
also,  not  only  puts  but  at  once  denies.  It  is 
that  of  modern  Judaism  which  strives  after 
an  ethical  deepening  of  the  religious  life  yet 
retains  the  connection  with  the  ancestral 
faith.  With  a  certain  pride  the  boast  is 
made  that  the  religious  development  of  Is- 
rael received  no  impression  from  Jesus  of 
Nazareth ;  yea,  that  it  did  not  even  need  it. 
The  picture  we  are  told  which  the  New  Tes- 
tament gives  of  rabbinism  which  was  con- 
temporaneous with  Jesus,  is  wrong  and  one- 
sided; this  rabbinism  has  actually  in  itself 
quite  sufficient  forces  of  religious  inward- 
ness and  civilization;  to  all  the  much-ad- 
mired sayings  of  the  Nazarene  on  the  spir- 
ituality and  simplicity  of  religion  and   a 


The  Insufficient  Answer        27 

religion  of  love  parallels  could  be  adduced 
from  the  Jewish  ideas  of  that  time  and  its 
literature.  Finally  this  critique  goes  so  far 
as  to  show  that  Jesus  was  not  very  original, 
yea,  that  in  many  respects  he  was  a  product 
of  the  overstrainings  and  doubtful  aberra- 
tions of  this  inner- Jewish  development ;  that 
he  represents  no  new  type  at  all."1 

The  controversy  concerns  the  contrast 
between  Jesus  and  scribism,  not  Judaism  in 
general.  Alongside  of  scribism  many  re- 
ligious movements  existed  in  Judaism  at 
that  time.  There  was  not  wanting  a  sub- 
tilizing enlightenment,  nor  a  popularly  na'ive 
distortion  of  religion  to  an  empty  exter- 
nality, childlike,  cherishing  fantastic  and  fa- 
natical hopes  of  the  future.  Over  against 
this  scribism  was  the  theologically  guarded 
and  regulated  religion.  We  know  this  reli- 
gion from  the  vast  literature  of  the  Talmud 
and  like  productions.  In  them  is  deposited  in 
bee-like  manner  all  the  additional  religious 
matter,  namely,  the  revelation  of  God  in  the 

1  The  latest  effort  of  such  a  proof  on  the  Jewish  side  is  by 
Dr.  J.  Eschelbacher,  Das  Judentum  und  das  Wesen  des 
Christenthums  (Schriften  der  Gesellschaft  zur  Forderung 
der  Wissenschaft  des  Judentums),  Berlin,  1905.  [See  also 
The  Jewish  Encyclopedia,  Article  Jesus. — Editor.] 


28  The  New  Message 

law  and  the  prophets  which  rabbinism  ap- 
propriated from  the  theological  and  religious 
movements  in  different  centuries.  From 
thence  came  the  parallels  between  the  words 
of  Jesus  and  rabbinic  statements  referred 
to  before,  which  are  to  refute  the  origin- 
ality of  Jesus.  They  certainly  exist  and 
are  related  to  the  linguistic  form,  to  the  way 
of  forming  ideas,  to  the  thoughts  them- 
selves. But  in  not  a  few  instances  this  con- 
cord loses  its  force,  because  the  Jewish-rab- 
binical material  for  comparison  is  evidently 
of  later  origin  than  the  word  of  Jesus.  Thus, 
for  example,  surprising  proofs  from  ancient 
Jewish  prayers  can  indeed  be  collected  for 
the  Lord's  Prayer ;  but  the  traces  of  their  ex- 
istence belong  to  the  second  century  A.D. 
In  other  cases  the  individual  statement  in 
the  mouth  of  the  rabbi  shows,  at  the  first 
glance  indeed,  a  very  strong  resemblance  to 
the  word  of  Jesus ;  but  a  closer  examination 
perceives  an  essential  difference  of  ethico- 
religious  force  between  both.1 


iThis  refers,  for  example,  to  the  word  of  rabbi  Hillel  (75 
B.C. -10  A.D.):  "What  is  hateful  to  thee,  do  not  unto 
thy  neighbor."  Hillel  is  said  to  have  called  this  "  the 
whole  law."  This  word  is  usually  quoted  as  parallel  to 
the  word  of  Jesus  in  Matt.  7.  12.     But  what  a  difference! 


The  Insufficient  Answer        29 

But  for  our  part  we  should  not  go  so 
far  as  to  deny  every  inner  relation  between 
Jesus  and  scribism  where  the  originality 
is  not  entirely  on  the  side  of  Jesus.  Jesus 
during  his  early  development  must  have 
lived  so  isolated,  as  in  fact  he  did  not, 
that  he  could  not  have  heard  and  learned 
something  from  rabbinism  which  was  found 
everywhere.  And  this  would  have  been  so 
void  of  the  spirit  that  it  could  not  otherwise 
but  coin  the  gold  committed  to  it  in  such 
alloy  that  of  the  original  precious  metal 
hardly  a  trace  were  to  be  perceived.  Even 
the  New  Testament  itself,  which  on  the 
whole  gives  a  very  horrible  picture  of  rab- 
binism, teaches  us  in  this  sense.  In  Nico- 
demus  it  certainly  shows  an  inwardly  dis- 
posed scribe  (John  3.  1-9).  The  lawyer, 
also,  of  whom  Luke  10.  25  speaks,  was  a 
rabbi.  To  the  question  of  Jesus  as  to  the 
way  of  salvation,  he  gives  a  clear  answer 
and  is  praised  by  the  Lord.  Even  in  his 
severe  address  against  the  scribes  and  Phari- 
sees (Matt.  23),  Jesus — for  the  time  being 


Hillel's  rule  says:  Never  do  anything  to  thy  neighbor, 
namely,  nothing  bad.  Jesus  said :  Do  always  something 
to  thy  neighbor,  but  plainly  good. 


30  The  New  Message 

at  least—- considers  their  teaching  as  still 
being  a  guide  to  piety.  All  this  is  good,  but 
the  New  Testament  shows  also  something 
else.  It  shows  that  Jesus  could  well  solve  the 
theological  problems  of  the  rabbis  (Matt. 
22.  15-40),  but  that  on  the  other  hand,  they 
had  no  understanding  for  his  deep  and  deep- 
est thoughts  (Matt.  22.  41 ;  John  3.  10).  It 
shows  that  that  very  lawyer  had  no  concep- 
tion how  to  apply  practically  his  beautiful 
knowledge  (Luke  10.  29).  It  shows  no  less 
that  scribism  had  lost  the  right  estimate  of 
essential  and  non-essential  things  (Matt.  23. 
23).  They  had  the  law  and  the  prophets; 
but  under  the  hand  of  the  scribes  it  was  the 
consummation  of  the  prophetical  spirit  which 
resulted  at  last  only  in  deadening  forms  of 
intrinsic  law,  continually  commented  upon. 
Extrabiblical  sources  confirm  this  view 
as  to  negative  result.  The  exactness  of  the 
nature  of  true  piety  and  morality  was  ren- 
dered coarse  in  rabbinism.  In  none  of  the 
scribes  do  we  meet  with  a  personality  in 
which  the  religious  idea,  in  its  original  purity 
and  creative  depth  and  in  its  directing  en- 
ergy, had  been  apprehended  and  expressed 
with  such  instructive  power  concerning  the 


The  Insufficient  Answer        31 

emancipation  and  separation  of  the  essential 
and  non-essential,  as  in  Jesus.  There  deep, 
sinking  words  form  an  exceptional  phenome- 
non. In  Jesus  the  expression  of  living  belief 
in  God  and  of  love  forms  the  rule,  the  whole. 
To  scribism  appertained  religious  serious- 
ness in  a  high  degree ;  but  its  demeanor  and 
teaching  lacked  cheerfulness  and  simplicity. 

In  the  controversy  before  us  we  cannot  but 
declare  that  Jesus  is  clearly  distinguished 
from  contemporaneous  scribism  and  that  he 
represents  a  new  phenomenon.  He  is  thus 
marked  off  first  of  all  by  the  peculiar  creative 
power  of  his  personality.  But  as  a  matter 
of  course,  this  peculiarity  also  shows  itself  in 
his  teaching;  and  for  this  we  need  not  seek 
long.  We  find  it  in  the  boundlessness  with 
which  he  radiates  love  into  all  distances  of 
humanity  and  into  all  depths  of  self-denial ; 
in  the  inexorableness  of  moral  energy  with 
reference  to  his  demands  for  a  God-related 
disposition;  in  the  certainty  with  which  he 
binds  the  communion  with  God — not  to  re- 
ligious intellectual  refinement — but  to  child- 
like simplicity  of  the  heart.  The  rabbis  and 
he  both  spoke  of  the  Father  in  heaven  and  of 
love  to  one's  neighbor ;  but  Jesus  meant  this 


32  The  New  Message 

and  that  in  an  entirely  different,  in  a  more 
direct,  sense  than  they  did. 

But  with  this  result  we  are  not  yet  at  the 
end  of  our  question.  In  the  distance  between 
Jesus  and  the  scribes  as  representatives  of 
the  religious  thought  in  Israel,  there  works 
a  factor  common  to  both.  He  and  they  were 
spiritually  fed  on  the  fruits  of  the  inner  his- 
tory of  the  old  covenant,  the  Old  Testament. 
One  can  indeed  inquire  into  the  relation  of 
Jesus  to  the  rabbis  by  asking  whether  he  did 
not  intend  to  reduce  religion  free  from  all  ac- 
cessories to  the  simple,  great  characteristic 
features,  which  Israel's  prophecy  had 
stamped  it.  For  matchless,  indeed,  in  the 
whole  history  of  the  mental  life  of  humanity 
is  this  phenomenon  in  the  religious  develop- 
ment of  Israel.  With  quiet  certainty,  with 
all  zeal  against  perversion  and  abuse,  with 
instinctive  power  these  heroes  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  rise  and  release  the  simple,  clear,  liv- 
ing ideal  of  sincerest  fear  of  God,  of  pure, 
earnest  morality  from  the  multifariousness 
of  transmitted  customs,  from  superstitious 
distortion  and  wanton  perversion.  They 
know  God  as  the  mighty  Lord,  the  everlast- 
ing friend,  the  merciful  Father  of  Israel 


The  Insufficient  Answer        33 

(Isa.  63.  16),  and  they  wait  for  a  time  when 
the  earth  shall  be  full  of  the  knowledge  of 
the  Lord,  of  this  Lord,  as  the  waters  cover 
the  sea.  Every  practice  of  the  cult,  ever  so 
carefully  done,  is  of  no  value  to  them ;  yea 
it  is  sin  in  their  estimation,  unless  it  is  ani- 
mated by  living  obedience  to  the  holy  will  of 
God  (Isa.  1.  10-17).  With  glad  faith  they 
bind  the  bond  between  the  Lord,  who  dwells 
in  the  high  and  holy  place,  and  those  who 
are  of  a  contrite  and  humble  spirit  (Isa.  57. 
15).  They  praise  the  happiness  of  the 
people  and  of  the  individuals  who  have  found 
their  refuge  in  God's  comfort  and  mercy 
(Isa.  12.  1-6;  40.  31).  Kind  love  for  the 
distressed  and  justice  to  all  is  in  their  eyes 
the  ornament  of  the  pious  (Micah  6.  8).  In 
a  regeneration  of  the  deepest  character 
they  see  the  salvation  of  the  future  (Jer.  31. 
31 ;  Ezek.  36.  26  seq.).  If  this  is  the  peculiar 
greatness  of  the  preaching  of  the  prophets 
and,  if,  on  the  other  hand,  with  the  views  of 
modern  and  older  theologians  before  stated, 
the  compass  or  contents  of  the  teaching  of 
Jesus  is  exhausted,  the  looked-for  definition 
of  the  relation  between  Jesus  and  the  scribes, 
now  follows.    His  independence  over  against 


34  The  New  Message 

them  is  rooted  in  this,  that  he  was  able  to 
renew  with  sympathetic  power,  the  prophet- 
ical, fundamental  thoughts.  This  conclusion 
is  certainly  comprehensible. 

But,  from  another  direction,  we  get  into 
greater  trouble.  Is  not  then  the  new  which 
Jesus  taught  merely  a  renewal  of  the  old? 
Wherein  differs  the  teaching  of  Jesus  as 
something  new  from  the  teaching  of  the 
prophets?  If  there  exists  no  clear  and 
worthy  answer  to  that,  the  question  is  very 
pertinent  whether  we  do  not  wrong  those 
worthies  of  the  old  covenant  by  the  sole 
prominence  given  to  Jesus  as  the  true  seeker 
and  knower  of  God  ?  Jesus  indeed  absolves 
us  from  such  a  mistake ;  he  asserted  nothing 
less  than  the  immense  distance  between  him- 
self and  the  prophets  before  him;  for  "all 
the  prophets  and  the  law  prophesied  until 
John,"  and  "among  them  that  are  born  of 
women  there  hath  not  risen  a  greater  than 
John  the  Baptist:  notwithstanding  he  that 
is  least  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  [which 
Jesus  announces]  is  greater  than  he"  (Matt. 
ii.  ii,  13). 

But  wherein  consists  this  greater,  this 
new?     The  theologians,  whose  school  we 


The  Insufficient  Answer        35 

have  thus  far  attended,  would  presumably 
not  approve  of  it,  if  we  should  say :  the  new 
consists  in  this,  that  Jesus,  stronger  by  far 
than  those  prophets,  yea,  exclusively  em- 
phasized the  relation  of  God  to  the  indi- 
vidual. The  prophets  do  not  entirely  rid 
themselves  of  a  glance  at  the  nation  and  the 
limitations  connected  with  it.  Jesus,  how- 
ever, awarded  to  each  individual  soul  of  man, 
in  whatever  body  it  was,  an  infinite  value, 
by  relating  to  that  very  individual  God's 
purpose  of  salvation.  According  to  this  in- 
dividualism, the  sense  of  personality,  were  the 
real  new  things  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  But 
this  boundary  between  Jesus  and  prophecy 
is  in  the  first  instance  only  valid  in  a  limited 
degree.  The  Psalms,  this  poetical  echo  of 
the  prophetic  revelation  of  God,  very  clearly 
show  that  even  in  that  Old  Testament  piety, 
the  certainty  of  an  immediate  relation  of  the 
individual  with  God  strongly  existed,  and 
Jesus  also  declared  that  the  union  of  the 
pious  in  a  congregation  ever  so  little  is  also 
the  place  of  a  special  work  of  God's  work  of 
grace  and  of  himself  (Matt.  18.  19). 

Nevertheless  there  exists  a  perceptible  dif- 
ference here  also  between  Jesus   and  the 


36  The  New  Message 

prophets.  But  in  the  second  place  it  is  not 
wrongly  referred  to,  that  this  difference  has 
its  basis  in  the  different  times.  When  the 
prophets  spoke,  Israel  was  a  nation  with  a 
political  present  and  future,  a  common- 
wealth; when  Jesus  spoke,  it  was  a  pre- 
eminently religious  community.  As  a  matter 
of  course  there  the  whole,  here,  however,  the 
individual,  came  to  the  foreground.  Such 
being  the  case,  the  new  in  Jesus  is  then 
not  his  most  original  work,  but  the  form 
conditioned  by  outward  circumstances 
which,  for  good  or  evil,  his  preaching  must 
assume.  Jesus  could  not  possibly  have  so 
aroused  the  conscience  of  the  Roman 
procurator,  at  least  with  reference  to  the 
religious  and  moral  regulation  of  the  life 
of  the  Jewish  people,  as  the  prophets  once 
did  the  native  kings.  Thus  his  authority 
naturally  turned  to  the  individual.  Whether 
this  should  be  accounted  to  him  as  special 
merit  may  perhaps  be  doubtful.  Yea,  some 
have  even  pointed  out  that  in  this  we  may 
see  a  certain  restriction  with  Jesus;  quite 
different  from  him  the  prophets  knew  to 
assert  the  fear  of  God  as  the  leaven  of  public 
life. 


The  Insufficient  Answer        37 

It  is  clear  that  on  this  way  we  do  not  get 
very  far.  On  this  account  one  can  under- 
stand that  many  seek  the  solution  in  a  funda- 
mentally different  direction.  They  deny  that 
Jesus  taught  something  very  special  and 
original ;  in  the  main  they  consider  his  teach- 
ing as  mere  renewal  of  the  best  prophetical 
thoughts.  But  nevertheless  Jesus  appears 
to  them  as  new,  as  never  before  existing, 
creative,  original  in  the  highest  sense.  For 
no  one  like  him  has  ever  filled  those  thoughts 
with  the  vigor  of  life  and  converted  that  life 
into  holy  reality.  Every  chasm  between 
thought  and  deed  is  overcome  in  him;  not 
like  ourselves  did  he  have  to  toil  up  from 
contrasts  to  perfect  God-inwardness;  for 
ever  and  ever,  and  fully  and  wholly,  it  filled 
him  with  purity  and  power. 

We  are  far  from  finding  fault  with  this 
matter  of  fact.  For  to  everyone  who  de- 
voutly brings  before  his  eyes  the  life-picture 
of  Jesus  in  its  real  and  full  content,  it  has 
something  humiliating  and  at  the  same  time 
uplifting;  it  overcomes  his  heart.  But  the 
more  seriously  must  we  ask  whether  from  the 
basis  of  the  hitherto  existing  assumptions, 
the  retreat  to  this  last  position  can  really  be 


38  The  New  Message 

accomplished  without  defeat.  For  thus  far 
we  have  worked  from  that  point  of  view  of 
consideration  which  the  "modern,"  "liberal," 
"negative,"  or  with  whatever  more  or  less 
appropriate  name  it  may  be  called,  this  very- 
theology  assigns  to  us.  It  teaches  us  to  seek 
out  in  Jesus — in  his  word  or  in  his  person — 
the,  for  the  first  time,  perfect  realization  of 
complete  religion.  We  have  already  ex- 
amined above  whether  and  in  how  far,  in 
face  of  certain  objections  on  the  part  of  the 
Jews,  this  point  of  view  can  be  asserted,  as 
if  the  religious  thought  which  Jesus  ex- 
pressed were  nothing  original.  But  we  must 
now  remember  another,  more  serious,  ob- 
jection from  that  quarter.  Modern  Jewish 
criticism  on  Jesus  and  his  relation  to  rabbin- 
ism,  that  is,  on  the  life-picture  which  the 
most  recent  Protestant  theology  sketches  of 
Jesus,  expresses  itself  thus:  "The  Nazarene 
was  in  the  beginning  impregnated  by  the 
serious  and  pure  thoughts  of  God,  as  rabbin- 
ism  also  represented  them ;  but  gradually  his 
inner  consciousness  became  disturbed;  he 
adopted  the  Messiah-idea;  got  into  fanciful 
expectation  of  the  future,  and  the  more  Juda- 
ism withdrew  from  him  on  that  account  the 


,The  Insufficient  Answer        39 

more  he  got  himself  into  an  inner  excite- 
ment, that  he  forgot  the  differences  between 
God  and  man  and  assigned  to  himself  a  place 
and  work  at  the  right  hand  of  God."  It  is  con- 
sequently denied  that  Jesus  was  able  to  retain 
in  himself  the  purity  and  depth  of  the  God- 
idea  to  the  end;  his  Messianic  claim  is  ex- 
plained as  a  darkening,  which  refers  to  his 
person  as  well  as  to  his  teaching ;  he  thereby 
gave  cause  for  the  Christ-belief  with  all  its 
sequences.  In  short,  Jesus  denotes  in  reality, 
in  the  very  peculiarity  of  his  personal  de- 
meanor, a  painful  obscuring  of  the  pure 
knowledge  of  God.  The  new  in  him  is, 
therefore,  alas!  something  little  pleasing. 

Thus  Jewish  criticism.  Can  modern  the- 
ology resist  it  for  its  conception  ?  We  must 
answer  this  question  with  all  emphasis  and 
seriousness  in  the  negative.  This  theology 
also  knows  and  cannot  deny,  that  Jesus 
ascribes  to  himself  a  very  peculiar  position 
in  the  kingdom  of  God ;  that  he  spoke  of  his 
resurrection  and  coming  again  in  glory ;  that 
he  made  the  claim  once  to  judge  the  world. 
It  knows  his  word :  "I  am — namely  Christ, 
the  Son  of  the  Blessed — and  ye  shall  see  the 
Son  of  man  sitting  on  the  right  hand  of 


40  The  New  Message 

power,  and  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven" 
(Mark  14.  62).  By  way  of  criticism  it  does 
indeed  what  it  can  to  minimize  the  sum  total 
of  the  testimony  of  Jesus  in  this  respect ;  but 
it  fails  to  eradicate  it  radically.  And  why 
does  it  wish  to  be  released  from  that  testi- 
mony? I  believe  that  none  of  the  theo- 
logians mentioned  before,  and  many  others 
beside  them,  will  or  can  seriously  complain 
when  we  answer:  Because  they  are  con- 
vinced that  that  claim  of  Jesus  is  not  opposed 
by  a  corresponding  reality.  According  to 
their  conception  Jesus  is  historically  acting 
in  a  very  quick  and  fruitful  manner,  more 
fruitful  than  any  other  hero  of  history,  but 
he  sits  not  in  personal  and  unique  activity 
on  the  right  hand  of  God  and  he  comes  not 
to  judge  the  world.  What  task  is  now  be- 
fore them?  This:  to  explain  how  Jesus 
could  arrive  at  that  bold,  strange  idea  con- 
cerning himself,  without  their  troubling  the 
purity  and  simplicity  of  his  humanity  and 
belief  in  God.  But  this  problem  is  unsolvable 
and  a  certain  feeling,  the  impossibility  of 
solving  it,  has  called  forth  efforts  to  explain 
the  Messianic  self-testimony  of  Jesus  in  gen- 
eral as  a  later  fiction.     One  might  almost 


The  Insufficient  Answer        41 

say  with  bitter  jest,  that  on  no  point  is  that 
modern  theology  so  harmonious  as  on  this, 
how  the  Messianic  self-consciousness  of 
Jesus  is  to  be  understood.  We  hear  it  on  all 
sides ;  this  consciousness  was  a  form  in  which 
Jesus  had  to  imagine  himself,  because  no 
other  idea  existed  in  Israel  by  means  of 
which  he  could  make  intelligible  to  himself 
and  others  his  unique  calling — to  be  teacher 
and  representative  of  a  perfect  religion ;  but 
when  fate  was  threatening  and  held  out  pros- 
pects of  his  own  personal  destruction,  he 
clung  to  the  Messianic  hope,  and,  by  its  appli- 
cation to  himself,  he  stamped  the  conviction 
that  his  word  and  his  activity  are  imperish- 
able. In  short,  the  conviction  of  the  divinity 
of  his  cause,  he  coupled  with  the  auxiliary 
notion  of  the  divinity  of  his  person.  That  is 
the  kernel,  this  is  the  shell ;  that  the  lasting 
essence,  this  the  perishable  form;  that  the 
world-receiving  truth,  this  the  fatal  error  of 
Jesus.  Well,  let  it  be  so ;  but  then  the  harm- 
lessness  with  which  many  understand  this 
Jesus  is  entirely  inexcusable.  How?  Jesus 
had  to  take  to  his  help  that  Messianic  notion, 
in  order  to  proclaim  the  greatness  of  his 
cause.     And  why?     Because  it  existed  in 


42  The  New  Message 

Israel  ?  But  Jesus  worked  out  a  very  differ- 
ent Messianic  hope  from  that  which  existed 
in  Israel;  one  so  widely  antagonistic,  that 
he  was  condemned  to  death  by  the  Jews  be- 
cause of  this  opposition  and  for  no  other 
reason.  So  little  familiar  was  this  Messiah- 
picture  at  that  time  in  the  sphere  in  which 
Jesus  moved,  that  not  even  the  God-enlight- 
ened prophet,  John  the  Baptist,  could  ac- 
commodate himself  to  it  without  victory 
over  himself.  And  could  Jesus,  only  in  this 
way,  bring  the  conviction  of  his  unique  call- 
ing into  a  certain  form  of  thought  ?  But  he 
had  for  this  conviction  the  setting  of  proph- 
etism — a  clear,  grand,  living  phenomenon — 
which  would  have  been  sufficient  for  his  self- 
characterization,  if  his  calling  needed  this,  to 
express  the  essence  of  the  perfect  fear  of 
God  and  the  love  of  God.  How?  Must  he 
put  himself  by  the  side  of  God,  to  assert  his 
word  as  God's  word?  But  in  truth  it  be- 
longs already  to  the  foundations  of  every 
mental  greatness  of  a  man,  that  he  is  able 
to  distinguish  between  person  and  object. 
Religion,  however,  has  directly  a  proof  of 
its  genuineness  in  that  the  more  it  receives 
of  God,  and  the  higher  the  calling  with 


The  Insufficient  Answer        43 

which  it  is  entrusted,  the  more  earnestly  and 
surely  and  strictly  does  it  experience  the  dif- 
ference between  God's  greatness  and  man's 
lowliness.  Beyond  these  simple  facts  none 
of  those  modern  efforts  can  bring  us  to  ex- 
plain the  Messianic  self-consciousness  of 
Jesus,  no  matter  how  much  it  may  seem  to 
summon  ever  so  great  psychological  skill 
and  sensitiveness.  This  Jesus  had  rather  to 
be  delivered  from  himself,  and  modern  the- 
ology has  finally  rendered  him  this  perfect 
service.  Heretofore  we  restricted  ourselves 
into  seeking  the  new  in  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
in  the  full  purity  and  simplicity  of  his  per- 
sonal life-contents,  in  order  not  to  suffer  him 
to  become  a  mere  disciple  of  the  prophets; 
this  road  is  now  impassable  for  us. 

Consequently  the  matter  now  stands  thus : 
We  started  from  a  certain  supposition  and 
assumed  hypothetically,  that  the  new  in  Jesus 
consisted  in  this  or  was  limited  to  this ;  that 
he  developed  religion  to  perfect  inwardness, 
truth  and  morality.  We  endeavored  to  up- 
hold this  supposition  against  objections 
which  were  raised  this  way  or  that  way ;  but 
every  path  which  we  took  for  this  purpose 
finally  led  us  into  the  dark.     One  cannot 


44  The  New  Message 

understand  Jesus  as  a  great  and  new  phe- 
nomenon in  itself,  still  less  as  the  center  of 
the  history  of  religion,  so  long  as  one  accepts 
another  view  of  his  historical  activity  than 
that  expressed  in  the  alleged  supposition. 
And  yet  Jesus  himself  was  definitely  sep- 
arated from  everything  which  went  before 
him  and  from  everything  which  follows  him. 
Wherein  then  lies  the  new  doctrine  which 
he  taught  ? 


Ill 

THE  TRUE  ANSWER 

What  did  Jesus  really  teach  ?  "The  time 
is,  fulfilled  and  the  kingdom  of  God  is  at 
hand:  repent  ye,  and  believe  the  gospel" 
(Mark  i.  15;  Matt.  4.  17).  For  the 
understanding  of  this  word  one  must  cling 
to  the  idea  "kingdom  of  God,"  and  to 
define  its  content  according  to  the  sense 
of  Jesus  in  contradistinction  to  the  common 
Jewish  notions  thereof.  This  work  is  im- 
portant and  is  remunerative.  But  it  must 
also  not  be  overlooked  that  in  his  preaching, 
when  speaking  of  the  kingdom  of  God, 
Jesus  does  not  come  forth  as  with  a  per- 
fectly new  matter,  but  he  supposes  in  his 
hearers  an  idea  and  elementary  notion 
thereof.  It  may  be  that  the  idea  needed 
correction,  but  it  nevertheless  existed.  The 
emphasis  therefore,  in  that  scripture  sen- 
tence is  not  at  all  on  the  object  of  the 
statement,  but  on  the  statement  itself:  "at 
hand"  is  the  kingdom  of  God.  With  much 
emphasis  this  very  statement  runs  through 

45 


46  The  New  Message 

the  entire  preaching  of  Jesus.  It  appears  in 
the  height  of  his  activity;  with  it  he  sends 
his  disciples  into  the  cities  and  villages  of 
the  Jews  (Matt.  10.  7).  Its  sound  is  heard 
in  the  solemn  hours  of  the  last  days  of  Jesus, 
and  becomes  a  comfort  and  blissful  hope 
(Luke  21.  31).  Certainly  "at  hand"  by  no 
means  denotes  plainly  it  is  here.  It  denotes 
as  much  as  "come  nigh."  And  this  does  not 
preclude  the  petition  for  its  real  and  final 
coming  (Matt.  6.  10).  This  "being  near" 
can  even  protract  itself  and  offer  yet  the 
opportunity  to  exercise  one's  self  in  expecta- 
tion and  longing.  And  yet  it  is  a  word  of 
very  great  weight,  this  "it  is  at  hand."  For 
it  says,  "that  the  kingdom  of  God" — who 
knows  how  long  and  how  far  it  has  been  dis- 
tant from  Israel,  that  it  is  now  in  motion 
and  has  now  overcome  this  distance,  so  much 
so  that  it  is  immediately  before  the  door; 
that  a  thin  covering  has  only  to  fall  off  and 
its  full  glory  be  seen  in  the  midst  of  the 
world.  Yea,  the  thought  can  increase  to 
the  immediate  certainty,  that  the  kingdom 
of  God  is  here;  that  it  broke  in  with  force 
(Matt.  12.  28  and  11.  12,  in  which  place  it 
must  be  translated :  the  kingdom  of  heaven 


The  True  Answer  47 

sets  in  with  force) — so  energetically  the  no- 
tion of  the  decisive  advancement  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  is  contained  in  that  "at 
hand."  Is  this  now  a  new  teaching?  No. 
For  teaching  is  something  theoretical,  a 
statement  on  conditions  remaining  the  same, 
which  are  not  yet  fully  perceived,  or  which 
are  to  be  defined  clearly,  or  appropriated  by 
the  older  generation  to  the  thought  of  the 
younger.  That  word  denotes  nothing  of 
the  kind.  That  sentence  is  a  statement  that 
in  the  great  world  of  realities,  of  the  highest 
realities,  something  has  changed ;  something 
new,  great,  glorious  has  come  to  pass  and 
comes  to  pass.  This  is  no  teaching,  but  a 
message.  A  new  message  of  the  great  deeds 
of  God — this  is  the  new  in  the  teaching  of 
Jesus.  That  on  the  strength  of  that,  men 
may  and  must  change,  deepen,  familiarize 
their  knowledge  of  God ;  that  they  may  have 
to  transform  and  purify  their  moral  concep- 
tions in  accordance  with  the  new  knowledge, 
all  this  to  be  sure  is  necessarily  associated 
with  it. 

On  this  account  Jesus  adds  also  to  the 
message  the  appeal:  "Repent,"  that  is, 
change  your  disposition  and  believe  the  gos- 


48  The  New  Message 

pel.  But  Jesus  would  have  never  made  these 
new  demands  had  he  not  been  in  a  position 
to  give  them  a  living  relation  to  the  new 
message,  which  fell  from  his  lips.  Hence  all 
those  difficulties  which  we  dealt  with  above 
vanish  because  we  had  adopted  a  supposition 
in  which  that  word  "is  at  hand"  had  not  been 
fully  appreciated.  Now,  however,  the  dif- 
ference between  Jesus  and  rabbinism  be- 
comes clear  and  great  at  the  same  time.  The 
scribes  had  also  spoken  of  the  kingdom  of 
God;  in  many  respects  they  differed  from 
Jesus,  but  this  is  not  the  most  important ;  the 
most  important  was  that  they  knew  nothing 
of  it  and  had  nothing  to  say;  that  now,  just 
now,  this  kingdom  of  God  makes  its  be- 
ginning with  power.  Furthermore,  Jesus 
also  stands  out  clearly  enough  from  the 
prophets.  They  spoke  in  general,  at  least  not 
as  yet,  of  a  kingdom  of  God ;  but  though  the 
word  was  foreign  to  them,  they  nevertheless 
had  in  them  a  living  hope  of  a  future  in 
which  God  would  be  present  in  Israel  as 
helper.  But  it  was  only  a  hope,  and  Peter 
strikingly  points  out  how  they  had  to  be 
satisfied  to  read  in  this  who  knows  how  dis- 
tant a  future  (i  Pet.  i.  10-12)  !    Jesus  how- 


The  True  Answer  49 

ever  comes  forth  and  proclaims :  "The  time 
is  fulfilled."  Thus  that  simple  observa- 
tion frees  us  from  serious  difficulties  which 
formerly  seemed  insuperable.  And  concern- 
ing the  last  and  highest,  the  supernatural 
self-appreciation  which  Jesus  bestowed  upon 
himself — it  may  yet  possibly  clear  up  in  its 
harmony  with  Jesus's  purest  humility  and 
simplicity,  when  we  consider  a  little  closer 
this  his  new  message. 

''The  kingdom  of  God  is  at  hand"  In 
our  consideration  we  get  the  advantage  over 
the  perplexed  question — what  this  kingdom 
is  and  what  individual  signs  are  contained  in 
its  idea,  and  how  they  adjust  themselves,  by 
drawing  the  simple  inference,  that  in  the 
kingdom  of  God,  God  himself  exercises  his 
active  sovereign-presence.  Where  the  king- 
dom of  heaven  is  not,  God  is  not,  or,  is  at 
least  not  so  present  as  he  is  in  his  kingdom. 
This  is  perhaps  a  bold  thought  but  it  is  un- 
avoidably contained  in  that  sentence.  Our 
idea  of  God  and  already  also  that  of  the 
Jews,  could  and  certainly  can  surrender  the 
thought  of  God  not  as  present  and  efficient 
everywhere.  But  when  we  wish  to  think 
with  Jesus,  we  must  distinguish  this  omni- 


50  The  New  Message 

presence  of  God  from  a  special  kind  of  his 
existence  in  the  world.  It  consists  in  this 
that  he  is  present  not  merely  as  Lord,  ruler 
and  preserver  of  life,  but  as  Redeemer, 
Helper  and  miracle-worker.  With  rejoicing 
Israel  knew  itself  from  times  of  old,  as  the 
sphere  of  such  special  gracious  activity  of 
God,  and  Jesus  fully  confirmed  this  claim; 
for  the  God,  of  whom  he  speaks,  he  knows 
and  affirms  as  the  God  of  the  forefathers  of 
Israel,  the  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Ja- 
cob in  a  sense  in  which  he  offered  not  him- 
self as  God  to  any  other  nation  and  their 
ancestors  (Matt.  22.  32).  Thus  the  world 
separates  into  two  uneven  parts;  the  large 
one  when,  to  speak  with  Paul,  God  suffers 
the  nations  to  walk  in  their  own  ways,  not 
without  leaving  himself  a  witness  (Acts 
14.  16)  ;  and  the  smaller,  when  God  puts  in 
motion  redeeming-forces  of  a  new,  incom- 
prehensible kind.  But  the  message  of  Jesus 
urges  us  farther  on.  For  in  this  narrower 
sphere  it  places  over  against  the  present 
when  God  has  drawn  near,  a  past  in  which 
God,  in  spite  of  all,  is  still  far  off,  relatively 
distant,  and  was  only  about  to  come  near  to 
Israel  from  such  a  distance.     As  concerns 


The  True  Answer  51 

space  and  time,  the  attitude  of  God  toward 
his  world  differs ;  but  the  message  of  Jesus 
says  that  now  and  in  Israel  is  the  time  and 
the  place  where  this  attitude  of  God  ex- 
presses itself  most  peculiarly  and  vitally  in 
its  singular  manner,  that  now  the  kingdom 
of  God  is  at  hand.  Once  more  then:  not 
what  must  change  and  become  new  in  men 
in  the  depths  of  their  minds,  but  that  some- 
thing changes  and  becomes  new  from  God ; 
this  is  the  nucleus  of  the  message  of  Jesus. 
Thus  far  we  have  moved  in  very  general 
statements  concerning  this  remarkable  new 
work  in  and  of  God.  It  is  fascinating  to 
follow  the  development  of  this  new  message 
in  the  preaching  of  Jesus.  When  Jesus 
preached  in  Nazareth,  his  native  town,  he 
gave  as  it  were,  a  commentary  to  that  mes- 
sage of  the  arrival  of  the  kingdom  of  God. 
From  the  prophet  Isaiah  he  read:  "The 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me,  because  he 
hath  anointed  me  to  preach  the  gospel  to 
the  poor ;  he  hath  set  me  to  heal  the  broken- 
hearted; to  preach  deliverance  to  the  cap- 
tives, and  recovering  of  sight  to  the  blind ; 
to  set  at  liberty  them  that  are  bruised;  to 
preach  the  acceptable  year  of  the  Lord," 


52  The  New  Message 

and  added,  being  himself  moved  by  this  pow- 
erful promise:  "This  day  is  this  scripture 
fulfilled  in  your  ears"  (Luke  4.  18-21 ).  This 
— "it  is  fulfilled" — springs  from  the  like- 
energetic  certainty  to  that  of  "is  at  hand." 
Thus  that  present  nearness  and  presence  of 
God  also  consists  in  this,  that  that  which  now 
takes  place,  or  commences  to  take  place,  is 
that  which  was  promised  by  the  prophet. 
But  can  one  command  the  blind  that  they 
see?  No.  Therefore  it  is  also  not  the  de- 
mand of  a  new  human  attitude,  the  longing 
of  a  self-deliverance  with  which  God  now 
comes  to  man.  But  God  has  decided  now 
to  do  something  on  his  part  which  he  did  not 
before;  to  perform  great  deliverance-deeds 
and  works  of  healing  on  them  that  are 
bruised  and  miserable.  In  quite  the  same 
sense  Jesus  answered  the  doubting  or  urging 
John  in  the  message  of  the  deliverances 
which  now  take  place  and  are  to  take  place 
(Matt.  11.  5).  This  power  of  help  is  the 
violence  with  which  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
now  advances  (Matt.  11.  12).  From  this, 
that  Jesus  delivers  those  miserable  demoniacs 
from  their  tormentors,  every  one  can  per- 
ceive that  the  kingdom   of   God   is  come 


The  True  Answer  53 

(Luke  11.  20).  The  kingdom  of  God  is 
therefore  the  strong  finger  which  God  lifts 
up  to  drive  away  the  enemies ;  it  is  the  help- 
ing hand  which  he  stretches  out  to  save  the 
corrupted;  it  is  the  power,  the  victorious 
war  with  which  God  comes  upon  the  palace 
of  the  "strong  man,"  the  prince  of  this 
world,  to  wrest  from  him  his  spoils  (Luke 
11.  19).  The  kingdom  of  God  is  the  re- 
demption which  bids  every  one  to  whom  it 
comes  to  gladly  lift  up  his  head  (Luke  21. 
28)  ;  it  is  the  banquet  which  God  prepared 
long  ago  and  now  gives,  to  gather  the 
hungry  and  wretched  that  they  may  enjoy 
it  (Matt.  22.  2).  Jesus  passes  through  the 
country  and  wherever  he  is,  help  and  salva- 
tion spring  under  his  hands;  but  whatever 
he  does,  it  is  only  as  it  were  in  illustration  of 
his  message  of  the  kingdom  of  God;  a  few 
fragments  from  the  totality  of  a  compre- 
hensive divine  deed  of  salvation.  Of  what 
kind  it  is  can  be  more  clearly  defined.  In 
the  beginning  of  his  ministry,  according  to 
John  3,  Jesus  had  that  nocturnal  conversa- 
tion with  Nicodemus.  There  the  question 
was  likewise  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  But 
God  manifests  not  his  highest  energies  in 


54  The  New  Message 

outward  life  but  in  this — that  he  grants  the 
spirit  of  regeneration.  With  this  thought  a 
new  series  of  pictures  and  revelations  opens. 
The  kingdom  of  God  is  the  water  of  life 
which  God  now  suffers  to  bubble,  to  quench 
the  thirst  forever;  it  is  the  bread  of  life 
from  heaven  to  keep  off  death  (John  6.  32 
seq.)  ;  a  good  fruitful  seed  which  God  scat- 
ters over  the  field  of  the  world  (Matt.  13. 
24  seq.)  ;  the  leaven  which  is  mixed  into  the 
meal  of  the  human  race  (Matt.  13.  33). 
And,  if  one  wishes  to  include  the  whole  in  a 
narrower  compass,  let  him  say:  the  new, 
which  God  does  sow  in  order  to  realize  that 
approach  of  himself  and  of  his  kingdom,  is 
this — that  he  gets  ready  to  bring  about  the 
precious  sum  of  promises  which  Jesus  prom- 
ised in  the  beatitudes  of  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  (Matt.  5.  3-12).  The  highest  treas- 
ures of  his  life  and  his  love  God  has  kept 
under  lock  and  key  till  then;  now  he  opens 
them  up  and  a  fullness  of  help,  consolation 
and  blessing  runs  through  the  poor  world 
to  redeem  it — this  is  the  meaning  of  the 
new  message  which  Jesus  brings. 

There  may  be  a  view  of  God  and  the 
world  to  which  such  a  thought  may  be  unin- 


The  True  Answer  55 

telligible.  That  God  moves  from  a  'not 
yet!'  to  a  'now!';  that  he  himself  passes 
through  the  difference  of  darkness  and  mani- 
festation, of  silence  and  speech,  of  design 
and  deed,  of  quiet  looking  on  and  energetic 
grasping,  is  very  inconceivable.  It  knows 
indeed  a  progress,  but  this  belongs  entirely 
to  humanity;  its  ability  to  embrace  God  in 
himself  increases,  not  however  the  desire  of 
God  to  come  out  of  himself.  And,  even  if 
this  were  so,  it  is  still  no  new  relation  which 
he  gives  to  the  world,  but  even  the  one,  orig- 
inal and  unchangeable,  that  of  being  the 
mental  life-foundation  of  the  world.  But 
though  the  view  opposed  to  this  may  com- 
prise ever  so  many  difficulties — this  changes 
nothing  of  the  fact,  that  Jesus  expressly 
uttered  it,  yea,  that  he  inseparably  connected 
it  with  the  new  message  which  he  brought. 

But,  may  this  message  really  be  considered 
as  new  and  as  peculiar  to  Jesus  ?  Thus  we 
must  ask  once  again.  For  according  to  the 
record  of  Matthew,  John  the  Baptist  already 
preached  before  Jesus :  "Repent  ye ;  for  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand"  (Matt.  3.  2). 
With  this  we  stand  indeed  on  firm,  historical 
ground ;  for  according  to  Jesus's  own  word, 


56  The  New  Message 

the  special  greatness  of  the  Baptist  consisted 
in  this,  that  he  was  allowed  to  proclaim  that 
message  immediately  before  himself  (Matt. 
ii.  ii,  14).  But  when  John  declared  that 
after  him  a  mightier  one  shall  come,  he  may 
well  have  had  the  feeling,  that  in  his  mouth 
that  message  will  have  an  entirely  different 
meaning  than  in  his  own.  And  when  Jesus 
commenced  his  ministry,  John  felt  such  a 
great  distance  between  his  own  thoughts  and 
the  work  of  Jesus,  that  he  asked :  "Art  thou 
he  that  should  come,  or  do  we  look  for  an- 
other?" Despite  these  facts,  it  cannot  be 
doubted  that  an  inner  harmony  exists  be- 
tween the  main  thought  of  the  message  of 
John  and  that  of  the  message  of  Jesus.  The 
Baptist  too  had  to  proclaim  it  as  a  something 
new  that  God  had  entered  upon  a  de- 
cisive forward-movement.  But  two  causes 
prevent  us  from  regarding  the  message  of 
Jesus  as  a  mere  imitation  of  the  Johannean. 
The  Baptist  proclaims  the  nearness  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  because  he  knows  that 
"mightier"  is  on  the  way;  Jesus,  how- 
ever, because  he  is  himself  this  "mightier" ; 
that  means,  the  Baptist  proclaims  it  as  one 
to  be  expected  very  shortly,  Jesus  as  a  work 


The  True  Answer  57 

of  God  now  becoming  realized.  The  mes- 
sage of  the  former  establishes  the  final  close 
of  prophecy ;  that  of  the  other  the  beginning 
of  its  fulfillment.  This  is  the  one  difference. 
And  the  other:  the  Baptist  and  Jesus,  both 
proclaim  a  double  content  of  the  divine  for- 
ward-movement, judgment  and  grace.  But 
the  Baptist  emphasized  judgment,  Jesus  em- 
phasized grace.  Thus  the  message  of  Jesus 
remains  new  and  independent  even  in  the 
face  of  that  of  his  most  immediate  prede- 
cessor; in  this  direction  it  comes  also  not 
from  man,  but  from  God. 

Yes,  from  God !  That  God  has  arisen  to 
permeate  the  world  with  the  powers  of  his 
salvation  and  to  save  it,  can  only  enter  into 
the  mind  of  a  man  to  whom  God  had  re- 
vealed it.  Teachings  concerning  God  can 
be  invented  by  man;  messages  of  new  in- 
tentions and  acts  of  God,  should  they  not  be 
fraudulent,  must  come  from  God  himself; 
and  these  considerations  lead  us  to  make 
plain  also  that  last,  thus  far  not  yet  explained 
subject,  the  question  as  to  the  personal  dig- 
nity which  Jesus  claims.  Whoever  is  trust- 
ed by  God  with  a  new  message  to  the  world, 
is  a  prophet.     If  Jesus's  message  was  the 


58  The  New  Message 

highest  of  all,  he  is  also  the  highest  among 
the  prophets.  But  he  claimed  to  be  more 
(Matt.  1 6.  15  seq.).  He  called  himself  the 
Messiah ;  he  ascribed  to  himself  the  power  to 
have  authority  over  the  keys  of  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  (Matt.  16.  19),  and  spoke  of  his 
future  divine  glory  including  the  judgment. 
Before  we  were  in  inner  distress  over  against 
this  fact ;  can  we  now  understand  it  better  ? 
This  was  the  message  which  Jesus  had  to 
bring,  that  God  sends  new  powers  of  healing 
into  the  diseased  world,  and  that  on  this  ac- 
count the  kingdom  of  heaven  now  begins  on 
earth,  of  which  the  world  till  then  had  noth- 
ing but  longing  and  in  the  most  favorable 
case  among  the  Jews  only  hope. 

And  what  are  these  powers  of  love  ?  They 
flutter  not  in  secret  spell  through  the  air,  but 
are  comprised  in  him  who  could  call  himself 
the  physician,  who  healed  the  sick.  With  a 
glance  at  the  coming  son  of  Mary,  whom  his 
own  child,  born  unto  him  in  his  old  age,  is  to 
serve  as  herald,  Zacharias  rejoices:  "God 
hath  visited  and  redeemed  his  people"  (Luke 
1.  68).  This  son  of  Mary  goes  through 
Israel  and  a  gracious  message  comes  from 
his  mouth.     But  from  his  hands  and  even 


The  True  Answer  59 

from  his  garment  (Matt.  9.  21)  flows  the 
power  of  healing ;  from  his  depths  arises  the 
spring  of  new  life;  in  his  blood  is  dissolved 
the  great  debt  of  humanity.  Thus  he  was 
the  highest  among  all  messengers  of  God 
and  yet,  at  the  same  time,  more  than  a  mere 
messenger ;  for  that  divine  message  requires 
not  only  a  mouth  which  proclaims  it,  but 
also  a  hand  which  executes  it ;  and  this  up- 
lifted finger  of  God,  the  stretched-out  hand 
against  the  stronger,  the  bread  of  life  and 
light  of  life,  is  he,  he  himself,  his  own  mes- 
senger, the  Messiah  and  Saviour.  But,  if  he 
was  this,  he  could  also  demand  with  all 
energy  to  be  considered  as  more  than  a 
prophet.  The  setting  and  space  of  a  mere 
humanly  earthly  life  is  too  narrow  for  the 
mediation  of  a  fundamental,  continual,  di- 
vine help ;  it  expands  with  inner  necessity  to 
heavenly  power  and  eternal  divine  power; 
and  we  understand  that  he,  who  dies  on  the 
cross,  is  sure  of  ascending  to  the  right  hand 
of  God.  But  in  that  case  the  Messianic  testi- 
mony of  Jesus  is  understood,  not  as  an  un- 
necessary form,  but  as  a  revelation  of  the 
innermost  secret  of  the  message  of  God 
which  he  gave  us. 


60  The  New  Message 

We  endeavored  to  define  the  new  in  the 
teaching  of  Jesus.  The  way  which  we  first 
took  led  us  past  the  goal;  the  newness  of 
Jesus,  compared  with  scribism  and  the  proph- 
ets disappeared  under  our  hands;  and  not 
only  the  newness  of  his  teaching  but  the 
purity  of  his  personal  life  was  endangered. 
We  then  saw  that  we  could  not  confine  the 
new  teaching  of  Jesus  to  this  and  not  es- 
pecially seek  in  this,  that  he  revealed  unto 
us  a  new  ideal  of  the  fear  of  God;  conse- 
quently, we  returned  again  to  the  beginning 
and  conceived  it  more  deeply,  and,  behold, 
everything  became  more  definite  and  regu- 
lar, when  we  perceived  that  the  new  teaching 
of  Jesus  lies  in  the  message  which  he  brings, 
that  God  arose  to  transform  the  world  to  a 
kingdom  of  heaven  through  Jesus  of  Naza- 
reth. Indeed,  the  relation  of  Jesus  to  the 
scribes  around  him,  to  the  prophets  before 
him,  to  the  message  of  God  beside  him,  yea, 
his  relation  to  himself,  is  clear  and  true,  be- 
cause the  new  of  his  teaching  is  comprised  in 
the  simple  news:  "For  God  so  loved  the 
world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son, 
that  whosoever  believeth  in  him  should  not 
perish,  but  have  everlasting  life." 


Fi'rniVii   Theol°9|cal  Semmary-Speer  Libri 


1    1012  01146  1441 


•.v.".  .  .    ...  :  •.:■:  .■:.::         ■        ::■  .•;.:...  .....  .....     ■     ■  ■      .• ...    . 

.; ■•       -  ■  •  v-  -  V.v.V. •.••.:■  .-..•      ■.•■.-.    •.-.•-■  -.     ■.-.-.'.■  ■:    -.:     ••    • 


.  .      ....      :  .  ;  .- -..'. 

■    :•'.•'.•  .-..'.•. ■...-.. vi". ■.v.-.-v.\      .  -.     ■       ■    •.'.! 

'  ■;■  'V.      .        '"   '  V   '-  "'-V  .        ■.'  V.  ';;-.' 


'.■ .-".'.  ...".- ..':       '.'.':       .'    '■"■.'''■'''.'.    '..•':'-■';'"    '.  .        .'-.':    V       .    :*:V:;  >-.j.-y\      .•'.     .     .   .'.     .      . 


V     -'•.■'•         ■.-..■■         ■■•'.■..■"'■•.■■.'-■••■■'■  •":■.-'.'•     v.'.  '■'•>.'■.  •.•.-;.'■'.■_.■' 


.      '     .     V.  ...".' 


